Literature DB >> 34034762

A compact system for simultaneous stimulation and recording for closed-loop myoelectric control.

Martin A Garenfeld1, Nikola Jorgovanovic2, Vojin Ilic2, Matija Strbac3, Milica Isakovic3, Jakob L Dideriksen4, Strahinja Dosen5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite important advancements in control and mechatronics of myoelectric prostheses, the communication between the user and his/her bionic limb is still unidirectional, as these systems do not provide somatosensory feedback. Electrotactile stimulation is an attractive technology to close the control loop since it allows flexible modulation of multiple parameters and compact interface design via multi-pad electrodes. However, the stimulation interferes with the recording of myoelectric signals and this can be detrimental to control.
METHODS: We present a novel compact solution for simultaneous recording and stimulation through dynamic blanking of stimulation artefacts. To test the system, a feedback coding scheme communicating wrist rotation and hand aperture was developed specifically to stress the myoelectric control while still providing meaningful information to the subjects. Ten subjects participated in an experiment, where the quality of closed-loop myoelectric control was assessed by controlling a cursor in a two degrees of freedom target-reaching task. The benchmark performance with visual feedback was compared to that achieved by combining visual feedback and electrotactile stimulation as well as by using electrotactile feedback only.
RESULTS: There was no significant difference in performance between visual and combined feedback condition with regards to successfully reached targets, time to reach a target, path efficiency and the number of overshoots. Therefore, the quality of myoelectric control was preserved in spite of the stimulation. As expected, the tactile condition was significantly poorer in completion rate (100/4% and 78/25% for combined and tactile condition, respectively) and time to reach a target (9/2 s and 13/4 s for combined and tactile condition, respectively). However, the performance in the tactile condition was still good, with no significant difference in path efficiency (38/8%) and the number of overshoots (0.5/0.4 overshoots), indicating that the stimulation was meaningful for the subjects and useful for closed-loop control.
CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the results demonstrated that the developed system can provide robust closed-loop control using electrotactile stimulation. The system supports different encoding schemes and allows placing the recording and stimulation electrodes next to each other. This is an important step towards an integrated solution where the developed unit will be embedded into a prosthetic socket.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Closed-loop control; Dynamic blanking; Electrotactile stimulation; Myoelectric prosthesis; Sensory feedback

Year:  2021        PMID: 34034762     DOI: 10.1186/s12984-021-00877-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neuroeng Rehabil        ISSN: 1743-0003            Impact factor:   4.262


  26 in total

1.  Stimulation artifact in surface EMG signal: effect of the stimulation waveform, detection system, and current amplitude using hybrid stimulation technique.

Authors:  Francesco Mandrile; Dario Farina; Marco Pozzo; Roberto Merletti
Journal:  IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 3.802

2.  Electrotactile and vibrotactile displays for sensory substitution systems.

Authors:  K A Kaczmarek; J G Webster; P Bach-y-Rita; W J Tompkins
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  1991-01       Impact factor: 4.538

Review 3.  Upper limb prosthesis use and abandonment: a survey of the last 25 years.

Authors:  Elaine A Biddiss; Tom T Chau
Journal:  Prosthet Orthot Int       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 1.895

Review 4.  Myoelectric forearm prostheses: state of the art from a user-centered perspective.

Authors:  Bart Peerdeman; Daphne Boere; Heidi Witteveen; Rianne Huis in 't Veld; Hermie Hermens; Stefano Stramigioli; Hans Rietman; Peter Veltink; Sarthak Misra
Journal:  J Rehabil Res Dev       Date:  2011

Review 5.  Improving the functionality, robustness, and adaptability of myoelectric control for dexterous motion restoration.

Authors:  Dapeng Yang; Yikun Gu; Nitish V Thakor; Hong Liu
Journal:  Exp Brain Res       Date:  2018-11-30       Impact factor: 1.972

6.  A System for Electrotactile Feedback Using Electronic Skin and Flexible Matrix Electrodes: Experimental Evaluation.

Authors:  Marta Franceschi; Lucia Seminara; Strahinja Dosen; Matija Strbac; Maurizio Valle; Dario Farina
Journal:  IEEE Trans Haptics       Date:  2016-10-19       Impact factor: 2.487

Review 7.  A review of invasive and non-invasive sensory feedback in upper limb prostheses.

Authors:  Pamela Svensson; Ulrika Wijk; Anders Björkman; Christian Antfolk
Journal:  Expert Rev Med Devices       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 3.166

8.  Applications of sensory feedback in motorized upper extremity prosthesis: a review.

Authors:  Jonathon S Schofield; Katherine R Evans; Jason P Carey; Jacqueline S Hebert
Journal:  Expert Rev Med Devices       Date:  2014-06-13       Impact factor: 3.166

9.  A blink restoration system with contralateral EMG triggered stimulation and real-time artifact blanking.

Authors:  Xin Yi; Jun Jia; Simin Deng; Steve Guofang Shen; Qing Xie; Guoxing Wang
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Circuits Syst       Date:  2013-04       Impact factor: 3.833

10.  The frequency of cortical microstimulation shapes artificial touch.

Authors:  Thierri Callier; Nathan W Brantly; Attilio Caravelli; Sliman J Bensmaia
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-12-26       Impact factor: 11.205

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.